Gianluca Plotino1, Nicola M Grande2, Elisabetta Cotti3, Luca Testarelli2, Gianluca Gambarini2. 1. Department of Endodontics, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: endo@gianlucaplotino.com. 2. Department of Endodontics, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Endodontics, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference in cyclic fatigue resistance between Vortex Blue (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK) and Profile Vortex nickel-titanium (Dentsply Tulsa Dental) rotary instruments. METHODS: Two groups of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments, ProFile Vortex and Vortex Blue, consisting of identical instruments in tip size and taper (15/.04, 20/.06, 25/.04, 25/.06, 30/.06, 35/.06, and 40/.04) were tested. Ten instruments from each system and size were tested for cyclic fatigue resistance, resulting in a total of 140 new instruments. All instruments were rotated in a simulated root canal with a 60° angle of curvature and a 5-mm radius of curvature of a specific cyclic fatigue testing device until fracture occurred. The number of cycles to failure and the length of the fractured tip were recorded for each instrument in each group. The mean values and standard deviation were calculated, and data were subjected to 1-way analysis of variance and a Bonferroni t test. Significance was set at the 95% confidence level. RESULTS: When comparing the same size of the 2 different instruments, a statistically significant difference (P < .05) was noted between all sizes of Vortex Blue and Profile Vortex instruments except for tip size 15 and .04 taper (P = 1.000). No statistically significant difference (P > .05) was noted among all groups tested in terms of fragment length. CONCLUSIONS: Vortex Blue showed a significant increase in cyclic fatigue resistance when compared with the same sizes of ProFile Vortex.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference in cyclic fatigue resistance between Vortex Blue (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK) and Profile Vortex nickel-titanium (Dentsply Tulsa Dental) rotary instruments. METHODS: Two groups of nickel-titanium endodontic instruments, ProFile Vortex and Vortex Blue, consisting of identical instruments in tip size and taper (15/.04, 20/.06, 25/.04, 25/.06, 30/.06, 35/.06, and 40/.04) were tested. Ten instruments from each system and size were tested for cyclic fatigue resistance, resulting in a total of 140 new instruments. All instruments were rotated in a simulated root canal with a 60° angle of curvature and a 5-mm radius of curvature of a specific cyclic fatigue testing device until fracture occurred. The number of cycles to failure and the length of the fractured tip were recorded for each instrument in each group. The mean values and standard deviation were calculated, and data were subjected to 1-way analysis of variance and a Bonferroni t test. Significance was set at the 95% confidence level. RESULTS: When comparing the same size of the 2 different instruments, a statistically significant difference (P < .05) was noted between all sizes of Vortex Blue and Profile Vortex instruments except for tip size 15 and .04 taper (P = 1.000). No statistically significant difference (P > .05) was noted among all groups tested in terms of fragment length. CONCLUSIONS:Vortex Blue showed a significant increase in cyclic fatigue resistance when compared with the same sizes of ProFile Vortex.
Authors: Murilo Priori Alcalde; Marco Antonio Hungaro Duarte; Clovis Monteiro Bramante; Bruno Carvalho de Vasconselos; Mario Tanomaru-Filho; Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru; Jader Camilo Pinto; Marcus Vinicius Reis Só; Rodrigo Ricci Vivan Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2017-12-09 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Gabriele Miccoli; Gianfranco Gaimari; Marco Seracchiani; Antonio Morese; Tatyana Khrenova; Dario Di Nardo Journal: Ann Stomatol (Roma) Date: 2017-11-08